Gujarat High Court
Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd vs Anil Kantilal Shah on 14 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/392/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 392 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 392 of 2025
==========================================================
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
Versus
ANIL KANTILAL SHAH & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 14/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, is preferred by the appellant being aggrieved
and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 28.10.2024
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad in
Motor Accident Claim Petition No.399 of 2015.
2. In order to admit the appeal, learned advocate for the
appelalnt mainly argued that the learned Tribunal has
committed serious error in assessing the monthly income of the
deceased to Rs.12000/- in absence of any cogent evidence
produced on record. In facts of the case, he would submit that
the claimants have produced Exh.53 document issued by the
Grass Solution Private Limited (in short "the firm"), but the
contents thereof are not proved as per the provisions of the
Evidence Act. The learned Tribunal ignored such aspect and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/392/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025
undefined
taken up the income stated in Exh.53 as income of the deceased
and thereby, erred materially. She would further submit that
taking o income of Rs.12000/- could be understood if it is
proved on record that the deceased was degree holder in
computer engineering, but in the present case, it indicates that
she has passed diploma in computer engineering and therefore,
looking to this aspect, taking up of income of Rs.12000/- is
higher than the rate of minimum wage. She would further
submit that at the relevant time, the rate of minimum wage was
Rs.7644/- and therefore, relying upon the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in case of National Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680, she
would submit that the learned Tribunal ought to have taken the
monthly income of the deceased prevailing at the time of the
road accident to fix the compensation for loss of future prospect.
Upon such submission, she prays to admit the appeal.
3. At the outset, what could be noticed that the deceased was
24 years at the time of road accident. Having passed diploma in
computer engineering, she lost her life in a killer road accident.
What further could be noticed that the deceased after completing
her diploma in computer engineering, joined the firm as trainee
in the PHP programme and after completing her programme, she
was about to join the firm and the job was already offered by the
firm on monthly salary of Rs.12000/- to her. Relevant document
is produced at Exh.53 before the learned Tribunal. Learned
advocate for the appellant disputed the evidentiary value of this
document on the ground that the contents thereof are not
proved. However, such submission cannot sustain. It is to be
noted that the proceedings before the MACT is a summary
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/392/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025
undefined
proceedings and therefore, rigors of the Evidence Act are not
strictly applicable to the proceedings under the MV Act. Even,
non-accepting of a document may be a procedural lapse, would
not affect the case of the claimant for getting just and fair
compensation. Needless to state that it is the duty of the MACT
to grant just and fair compensation to the victim of the road
accident.
4. In case of Vimla Devi Versus National Insurance Company
Limited, 2019 (2) SCC 186, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as
under:-
"If the Court did not exhibit the documents despite the
appellants referring them at the time of recording
evidence then in such event, the appellants cannot be
denied of their right to claim the compensation on such
ground. In our opinion, it was nothing but a procedural
lapse, which could not be made basis to reject the claim
petition. It was more so when the appellants adduced
oral and documentary evidence to prove their case and
the respondents did nothing to counter them."
5. In another case of Ramla Versus National Insurance
Company Limited, 2019 (2) SCC 192, in a case where a person is
working in foreign country, the Hon'ble Apex Court on
production of salary certificate by the claimant, granted
compensation on the basis of such salary certificate.
6. I may refer to the findings of the learned Tribunal in para
13 of the impugned judgment and award, which reads as under:-
"According to the documentary evidence the deceased
was Computer Engineer and at the time of accident she
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/392/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025
undefined
was doing PHP programme with Grass Solution Private
Limited Ahmedabad, and during the training
programme she was getting Rs.12,000/- per month and
to prove the same the petitioner has produced a
document at Exhibit 53, issued by Grass Solution Pvt
Ltd in favour of deceased. The said document was
exhibited as tentative with objection of the respondent
no.3 so it is the duty of the petitioner to prove the same
as per the Evidence Act. The petitioner in his
examination-in-chief has stated the fact but did not
examine the person who has issued the said document
at Exhibit 53 but the other documents like certificate of
Computer Engineering at Exhibit 40, HSC marksheet
Exhibit 49, Computer Engineering with first class and
certificate given to her by Academy of Computer
Technology dated 28.04.2010, Diploma and Degree in
the year 2014. So from these documentary evidence the
petitioner is able to establish that the deceased was
Computer Engineer and she was brilliant and passed
out with first class so looking to her educational
qualification the income of the deceased is required to
be considered accordingly. The deceased had completed
her Engineering in the year 2014 and the accident took
place on 08.04.2015. Therefore, considering the same
the income of the deceased is considered at Rs.12000/-
per month."
7. It is to be noted that the deceased completed her diploma
in computer engineering is proved by document at Exh.40 and
after that she joined the firm as trainee in the PHP programme
and after completing her programme, she was about to join the
firm and the job was already offered by the firm on monthly
salary of Rs.12000/- to her. All these aspect led to the learned
Tribunal to fix the monthly income of the deceased to
Rs.12000/- and therefore, the contention of the learned advocate
for the appellant that the learned Tribunal ought to have taken
up the monthly income of the deceased considering the rate of
minimum wage at the time of the road accident is unacceptable.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/392/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025
undefined
8. In view of above, the First Appeal sans merit and exercising
powers under Order 41 Rule 11 of the CPC, present First Appeal
stands dismissed at admission stage.
8.1 The Tribunal shall disburse the entire awarded amount
lying in the FDR and/or with the Tribunal, with accrued interest
thereon, if any, to the claimants, by account payee cheque /
NEFT / RTGS, after proper verification and after following due
procedure.
8.2 While making the payment, the Tribunal shall deduct the
courts fees, if not paid, in accordance with rules/law.
9. Consequently connected civil application also stands
disposed of.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SHEKHAR P. BARVE
